Midwestern Consulting

Some zoning ordinances are subject to the rule of unintended consequences. The intent is often not codified in a way that anticipates every possible application of the ordinance requirements. An example is the Ann Arbor Off-street Parking ordinance intended to prevent parking between commercial buildings and adjacent rights-of-way. 

Our client owns a shopping center in a C3/Commercial zoning district with frontage on three public streets. A remodeling project is proposed to construct entries on a blank face of the center and add parking between the building and the street.

City planning staff opposed parking in this location because the “intent” of Chapter 59 is to require buildings to be located close to front property lines with parking in side or rear yards. We argued that the “content” of the ordinance is the controlling factor and that the ordinance includes an exception for sites with multiple frontages.  We submitted a Zoning Compliance Permit Application.

Chapter 59, Section 5:168, item (2) c, describes an exception to the prohibition of parking between the building and the street. “Sites with more than 1 front line; the requirements of paragraph (1) in this section shall apply to only 1 front lot line. For all other lot lines abutting streets, parking shall be located behind the minimum front setback requirement, per Chapter 55 (Zoning).”

That paragraph reads “Vehicular parking structures, lots and space shall not be located in the front open space. No space within a parking structure or lot may be closer to the street than the front face of a building.”

1. The site has frontage on three public streets.

Item (2) c applies and requires that only 1 of the frontage cannot have parking between the building and the street.

The preliminary site concept showed proposed improvements including removal of all parking spaces between the building and one of the other two frontages, one that is functionally a rear yard.  Removing that parking makes that frontage comply with paragraph (1). The front line adjacent to proposed parking no longer has to meet that requirement.

1. The other two front lines are not subject to paragraph (1) and are subject to the requirement that “parking shall be located behind the minimum front setback requirement” which is 10 feet.

The Zoning Compliance Application was approved. The City immediately began the process of changing Chapter 59 to revise the ordinance to require a minimum 25 foot setback rather than the 10 minimum permitted in the C3 district.

We submitted a Site Plan that showed a minimum 25 foot parking setback and that was unanimously approved.

The controversial Varsity apartment complex to rise up next to the First Baptist Church on Washington Street in downtown Ann Arbor has gained final site plan approval from the Ann Arbor City Council.   Construction will begin this fall and is slated to open in late summer 2013.

See the full article from www.annarbor.com here.

“ZORO” is the City of Ann Arbor project to “clarify and reorganize the Zoning Ordinance and development-related Ordinances.”

After 40 years, the ordinances are riddled with revisions and overlapping and contradictory provisions.  Unclear ordinance definitions are often controversial and are subject to interpretation by the Planning Commission, Council, or the public. Departmental “policy” may substitute for clear and enforceable standards.  Recent site plan projects, for example, included major battles over the definition of “building height”, the definition of a multifamily unit, and the requirements for open space versus usable open space.

“ZORO” began with the consolidation of four area master plans into one.

The second phase is to:

-  make each chapter comprehensive and not rely on references to other chapters

-  provide clear, consistent standards, and definitions and formats

-  make chapters usable by laymen and professionals

-  make requirements enforceable and legally defensible

-  provide a structure that is easy to amend in the future

Major revisions so far:

• Chapter 55, Zoning, and Chapter 59, Off-Street Parking: these were revised in January 2011 when revised Area, Height and Placement Amendments were adopted. Approved Area Height and Placement Revisions
• Chapter 62, Landscaping and Screening: draft revisions are currently under review. Primary amendments impact conflicting land use buffer requirements and interior parking lot landscape design and function.  Draft Landscape Revisions

Ann Arbor developers hope these crucial revisions will foster a better understanding of the business and community benefits of their proposed real estate development projects.

To find out more about how new Ann Arbor ordinances can help your development project, please contact Earl Ophoff, Associate and Senior Project Manager at Midwestern Consulting, Ann Arbor, Michigan (734.995.0200).

The Michigan Legislature passed the Complete Streets transportation legislation yesterday.  Governor Granholm is expected to sign the bill into law soon.

The legislation is designed to make transportation engineers and city planners think about the needs of users of roadways other than motorists – mainly bicyclists and walkers.  If any of you have had the misfortune of riding your bike in the street and having rude motorists hog the roadway or honk at you in anger you know where this legislation is aimed.

We generally support this new design effort.  But what will it mean to cities, counties and townships?  Will the costs of acquiring new ROW access for sidewalks or bike paths, and their related constructon costs, be worth the effort to encourage residents to ditch their cars? 

If Michigan’s transportation engineers and city planners are serious in their efforts to promote a healthier lifestyle through walking and bicycle riding, there needs to be safe non-motorized pathways for people to use. 

But, we ask, at what cost?

What do you think?  Please leave a comment on this site.

Water mains for fire suppression serving multiple buildings under the same ownership and on the same parcel can be designed to save money on expensive City of Ann Arbor tap, connection, and meter charges (see chart below).

Connection Charges for Fire Service Connections   (Effective 1/1/09)

A recent project included two hotels on one parcel.  Big money was saved on fees by eliminating one fire suppression tap.  Fire suppression was provided by extending the proposed 6” water line from one hotel to the other saving the owner $103,260.

A second project included three rental apartment buildings with a total of 896 bedrooms on one parcel. One 8” tap and a booster pump replaced three 8” taps reducing City fees by $406,880.

This concept can be used in the City of Ann Arbor where there are multiple buildings under the same ownership on a single parcel.  For example, a privately owned office park, a commercial or academic campus, or a retail center with multiple structures and tenants could be designed this way to save big money on tap, connection, and meter charges.

Earl Ophoff, LSA, is a registered landscape architect and senior project manager with Midwestern Consulting, Ann Arbor, Michigan.  Call Earl at 734.995.0200.